Essential Reading for Understanding These Strange Times

 The Alien and Sedition Acts 

introduced by Qian Julie Wang

The Alien and Sedition Acts book cover

Author and legal scholar Qian Julie Wang

Many thanks to Random House, The Modern Library, and NetGalley for providing me with an advanced copy of The Alien and Sedition Acts, introduced with an inciteful and timely essay by Qian Julie Wang. Although this book is primarily comprised of the 4 acts that make up the Alien and Sedition Acts from 1798, Wang’s introduction is helpful in understanding just how contested and problematic these acts are. I found her history and critique of the acts to be especially timely in that we’ve heard so much about the current administration’s justification for many of their suspension of rights by using the Alien and Sedition Acts. While most people are outraged by these abuses of power, the dominatrixes at the center of these policy decisions point to the authority of these acts, initially proposed in the early days of the nation, as a means of justification. Seeming to point to originalism and tradition, they seem to assume that the populace will accept this as fact. Wang’s history, analysis, and critique of the Acts demonstrate how vastly unpopular it was with some of the most important figures in America’s foundation. From Thomas Jefferson’s skepticism and critiques to James Madison’s own private concerns about these “laws”, readers can understand many of the fundamental flaws of these acts and how they subvert democracy and freedom for all by concentrating power into the hands of a few. 

Although Jefferson had his own flaws, it’s surprising that not many reference his concerns about these acts when they’ve been brought up as a justification for the loss of due process and the threat of removal of habeas corpus. Wang quotes Jefferson critiquing these acts with “confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism—free government is founded in jealousy, not confidence,” and I appreciated these words to better understand the initial aims of the coalition of states that eventually became our union. In many ways, Yates’ own words nearly 120 years later about the Irish Revolution echo Jefferson’s concerns “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” Although we need rules and laws, do we really need to be governed “by a rod of Iron”? Wang cites numerous examples of the Alien Enemies Act being used to justify exclusory immigration laws like the Chinese Exclusion Act and other caps on immigration that lasted until the 1960s. She also discusses this act in one of the darkest periods in American history, the Japanese internment that followed the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Although there isn’t too much mentioned in the years that followed 9/11, it seems like the Bush regime also sought to stretch out these Acts to justify limiting rights and invasive practices like the Patriot Act. 

Wang’s historical analysis and critique eventually bring us to today where she critically examines the specious declaration of war on Tren De Aragua, a transnational gang originating in Venezuela, that suddenly seems to be at war on America, despite no attacks, no arrests, and no soldiers in our nation. Rather than think soundly about strategy or policy, the stable geniuses suddenly tasked with governing America seem to suffer from the kind of cognitive limitations that children engage in before they’ve mastered formal operations. There are strong markers of centration, where there is fixation on one feature to the exclusion of other possibly more important features and concerns. Likewise, there’s an egocentrism that seems to assume that the public will be on board or accepting because either the tasks have been justified with prior authority or because there’s some kind of mandate with winning the popular vote. It’s also clear that there’s a sense of irreversibility in that mistakes are job-losing offenses and that once immigrants are slated for deportation, there’s no challenging the state. I don’t want to get too off-task since this essay and the Acts themselves have challenged me to think more about the many problems with their justifications. I was really surprised to learn how much many of those responsible for the founding of the nation found problems and issues with these Acts. 

It’s hard to determine what is most pressing when all of these acts attack our fundamental freedoms in many different ways and in ways that privilege those in political power. As Wang demonstrates with historical analysis, the Sedition Act is a limitation on freedom of speech and freedom of the press that largely seeks to stymie anything critical of those in power. However, it is the suspension of habeas corpus that seems to be the most significant threat today. Wang notes that even within the act, section 2 requires the president “to first make the alien available to courts competent jurisdiction and afford ‘full examination and hearing’ to establish ‘sufficient cause’ for removal- legal procedure that the Trump administration flagrantly ignore.” Although it has been documented, the administration clearly acted criminally with malicious intent to subvert even this subversive law, prohibiting the law for aliens despite no precedent. Again, maybe it’s the cognitive limitations of those tasked with interpreting the law, but it’s clear what this act says. Maybe the administration hoped that the public would remain indifferent or uneducated about the law. However, thanks to publishers like Random House who have provided not only the full text of these acts, but also resolutions in Kentucky and Virginia that challenged the limitations of rights that these acts imposed, as well as Wang’s critical analysis, the public can better understand the misinterpretations of these flawed and problematic Acts. 

While I can understand that some might not enjoy reading the dry legal 18th century writing that these acts and resolutions contain (it’s not an easy read), I ended up appreciating the contents to help better understand the context of the Acts and the challenges to them that followed. It’s also helpful in understanding why these acts are rarely invoked. Although these acts are problematic, I found it somewhat ironic that within Section 1 of the Sedition Act, there is clear language that implicates many individuals who participated in January 6th along with the complicit legislators and the current president in activities that 

 “impede the operation of any law of the United States, or to intimidate or prevent any person holding a place or office in or under the government of the United States, from undertaking, performing, or executing his trust or duty, and if any person or persons, with the intent as aforesaid, shall counsel, advise or attempt to procure insurrection, riot, or unlawful assembly, or combination, whether such conspiracy, threatening, counsel, advice, or attempt shall have the proposed effect or not, he or they shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor….” 

It was surprising to read this, and although I suppose that rioting and insurrection could be in the eye of the beholder, it seems like much of the purpose of the Stop the Steal events of 1/6 were to impede official acts and intimidate lawmakers. Nevertheless, this collection that pulls together these Acts clarifies their problems and issues. While I can appreciate the need to counter challenges early in the nation’s history, Wang’s analysis identifies the ways that these acts were abused and misused to consolidate power and limit any kind of criticism. Despite these concerns of a young, insecure nation, it seems like we are revisiting and reviving some of the most egregious instances of injustice in our nation’s history. If anything, it’s not only a historical analysis, but also a warning and an offer for how to defend our rights against the abuse and misuse of a problematic Act. Essential reading for understanding and resisting these unprecedented times.